Minimal impact of postmastectomy radiation therapy on locoregional recurrence for breast cancer patients with 1 to 3 positive lymph nodes in the modern treatment era

De-escalated radiotherapy for HER2-overexpressing breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes undergoing anti-HER2 targeted therapy

Background

In the era of anti-HER2 targeted therapy, the potential clinical feasibility of considering HER2-overexpressing breast cancer cases presenting with 1-3 positive axillary lymph nodes as low-risk, and thereby contemplating postoperative radiotherapy reduction, remains an important subject for in-depth examination. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the effectiveness of de-escalated radiotherapy in T1-2N1M0 HER2-overexpressing breast cancer patients receiving anti-HER2 targeted therapy. Specifically, omitting regional lymph node irradiation (RNI) after breast-conserving surgery and only performing whole-breast irradiation or omitting postmastectomy radiation therapy.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 429 patients with stage T1-2N1M0 primary invasive HER2-overexpressing breast cancer from our center between 2004 and 2018. Patients who received anti-HER2 targeted therapy were divided into an RNI group and a no RNI group to assess the role of RNI. The prognostic role of RNI was investigated via the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards modeling.

Results

The median follow-up time was 46.8 months (range 7.1-225.8 months). In the anti-HER2 targeted therapy group RNI yielded no significant improvements in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) (p = 0.940), local-regional recurrence-free survival (p = 0.380), distant metastases-free survival (p = 0.698), or overall survival (p = 0.403). Estrogen receptor (ER) status (hazard ratio [HR] 0.105, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.023-0.749, p = 0.004) and lymph vascular invasion status (LVI) (HR 5.721, 95% CI 1.586-20.633, p = 0.008) were identified as independent prognostic factors for IDFS, and ER-positive and LVI-negative patients exhibited better prognoses.

Conclusion

Omitting RNI may be a safe option in T1-2N1 HER2-overexpressing breast cancer patients receiving standardized anti-HER2 targeted therapy; particularly in ER-positive or LVI-negative subgroups.

Risk factors to identify the indication for regional nodal irradiation in T1-2N1M0 breast cancer: A joint analysis of 4,243 real-world cases from two institutions

Purpose

The aim of this study is to evaluate the role of regional nodal irradiation (RNI) in patients with T1-2N1M0 breast cancer and to identify the subgroup that could benefit from RNI.

Methods and materials

A total of 4,243 women with pT1-2N1M0 breast cancer treated at two institutions in China were retrospectively reviewed. Survival rates were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by the log-rank test. The association of risk factors with survival outcomes was evaluated using multivariable proportional hazards regression.

Results

A total of 932 patients (22.0%) received RNI. At a median follow-up of 5.9 years, the 5-year locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant metastasis (DM), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) rates were 4.0% and 7.2% (P = 0.001), 13.2% and 10.6% (P = 0.465), 85.0% and 84.7% (P = 0.131), and 93.9% and 92.8% (P = 0.004) in the RNI and non-RNI groups, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that RNI was an independent prognostic factor for lower LRR (P = 0.001) and longer DFS (P = 0.013). Patients were stratified into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups based on the eight non-therapeutic risk factors. RNI significantly decreased the 5-year LRR (2.2% vs. 7.0%, P = 0.001) and improved the 5-year DFS (88.8% vs. 84.9%, P = 0.015) and OS (95.8% vs. 93.9%, P = 0.010) in the intermediate-risk group. However, neither the low-risk group nor the high-risk group had survival benefit from RNI.

Conclusion

T1-2N1M0 breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease. We found that RNI only improved survival in the intermediate-risk group. It might be omitted in low-risk patients, and the role of RNI in high-risk patients needs further study.

Postmastectomy radiotherapy: a review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review the role of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in the management of patients with early breast cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

PMRT in patients with 4 or more involved axillary lymph nodes is the current standard of care but the indications for PMRT in patients with 1-3 involved nodes remain controversial. The Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group meta-analysis of randomised trials of PMRT provides the most comprehensive level 1 evidence base. However, its applicability in contemporary practice in the context of recent multidisciplinary advances in surgery, radiation therapy and systemic therapy remains challenging.

SUMMARY

The lack of consensus on the indications for PMRT in patients with 1-3 positive nodes underpins the variations in the national and international guidelines on PMRT. We emphasise the need for contemporary randomised trial data, and the potential to refine patient selection for PMRT using novel biomarkers of recurrence and radiosensitivity.

Mastectomy alone for pT1-2 pN0-1 breast cancer patients: when postmastectomy radiotherapy is indicated

PURPOSE

To assess outcome of breast cancer (BC) stages pT1-2 N0-1 after mastectomy alone and to identify prognostic factors calling for the need of postmastectomy radiotherapy.

METHODS

Patients who were not eligible for breast conserving surgery (BCS) were operated on with mastectomy between 1998 and 2008. Locoregional (LRR), distant (DM) control and breast cancer specific survival (BCSS) were retrospectively evaluated. Cumulative incidence (CI) of events was estimated according to Kalbfleisch and Prentice while Gray's test tested difference. Kaplan-Meier method for survival and Cox proportional hazards model for univariable and multivariable analysis were used. A matched pair analysis between mastectomy alone and BCS plus whole breast irradiation (WBI), using the propensity score method, was performed.

RESULTS

1281 pT1-2 N0 and 1081 pT1-2 N1 were identified. Median follow-up was 8.2 years (9.2 years for survival). Overall, LRR rate was low for both N0 and N1 subgroups (10-year CI, 8.8% and 10.9%, respectively). Young age, lymphovascular invasion and Ki-67 ≥ 20% were proved to be statistically significant prognostic factors at multivariable analysis. The combination of ≥ 2 risk factors increased LRR rate to ≥ 15%. Risk factors combination weighed on LRR rate more than nodal status itself. DM rate doubled moving from negative to positive nodal status (10-year CI 10.5% versus 20.3%, respectively). BCSS remained high in both N0 and N1 subgroups (10-year CI 92.4% versus 84.5%, respectively). Remarkably, all the molecular subtypes except Luminal A significantly affected DM and BCSS both in the N0 and N1 subgroups. Nodes number significantly impacted on DM and BCSS but not on locoregional control. In the matched pair analysis, WBI decreased nodal recurrence rate and improved distant control, without affecting survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Selected patients, namely those with at least two additional risk factors, presented high enough LRR risk to support the use of postmastectomy radiotherapy in both N0 and N1 subgroups. Moreover, the observation that radiotherapy may provide benefits that go beyond local control deserves to be further investigated.

A Retrospective Dosimetric Analysis of the New ESTRO-ACROP Target Volume Delineation Guidelines for Postmastectomy Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy After Implant-Based Immediate Breast Reconstruction

Purpose: The European Society of Radiation & Oncology and Advisory Committee on Radiation Oncology Practice (ESTRO-ACROP) presented new guidelines for clinical target volume (CTV) delineation in post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) after implant-based immediate breast reconstruction (IBR-i). This study evaluated the dosimetric characteristics, dosimetric accuracy, and delivery accuracy of these guidelines in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods and Materials: This retrospective study included 15 patients with left breast cancer who underwent mastectomy with tissue expander placement followed by PMRT. An experienced radiation oncologist delineated the CTV twice on the same image datasets based on the ESTRO-ACROP (EA-TVD) and conventional target volume delineation (C-TVD) guidelines. All VMAT plans, which used a double partial arc, were generated using six MV photons. Clinically relevant dose-volume parameters for organs at risk were compared. Dosimetric accuracy of the treatment plans and delivery accuracy were assessed. Results: Target volume of EA-TVD was significantly smaller than that of C-TVD. Although no statistically significant difference was noted in the target coverage between the two VMAT plans, EA-TVD VMAT significantly reduced the mean heart dose (3.99 ± 1.02 vs. 5.84 ± 1.78 Gy, p = 0.000), the maximum left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) dose (9.43 ± 3.04 vs. 13.97 ± 6.04 Gy, p = 0.026), and the mean LAD dose (4.52 ± 1.31 vs. 6.35 ± 2.79 Gy, p = 0.028) compared with C-TVD VMAT. No significant difference was observed with respect to the total monitor units, plan complexity, and delivery quality assurance. Conclusions: This is the first study to show significant dose reduction for the normal heart and LAD tissue offered by the EA-TVD, while maintaining dosimetric and delivery accuracy, in PMRT after IBR-i in VMAT for left-sided breast cancer patients.

The role of different lymph node staging systems in predicting prognosis and determining indications for postmastectomy radiotherapy in patients with T1-T2pN1 breast carcinoma

PURPOSE

Based on the risk of locoregional recurrence (LRR), postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is recommended in T1-T2pN1 breast carcinoma (BC). We aimed to elucidate our institutional strategies underlying selection of these patients for PMRT. In the no-PMRT subset, we compared various lymph node (LN) staging systems' abilities to predict 5‑year overall and locoregional-free survival (OS/LRFS).

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 548 women with T1-T2pN1 BC undergoing mastectomy and axillary LN dissection. Depending on PMRT delivery, the participants were divided into the PMRT and no-PMRT groups. Predictors of OS/LRFS were calculated for the no-PMRT group only. Based on Cox regression modelling, the number of positive LNs (PLN), negative LNs (NLN), LN ratio (LNR), log odds of PLN (LODDS), and modified LNR (mLNR) were modelled, each respectively, with OS model covariates (age, grade III, lymphovascular invasion [LVI], tumor size, hormone receptor [HR] status) and LRFS model covariates (age, grade III, LVI). The C‑statistic, Akaike information criterion, and likelihood ratio χ² of the models were compared.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 60.5 (18-82), 61 (28-82), and 60 (18-80) months for the entire cohort, PMRT, and no-PMRT group, respectively. The PMRT and no-PMRT groups had comparable OS (p = 0.235). LRFS was better (p = 0.030) in the PMRT group comprising 105 subjects (19.16%) who were younger, more likely to have a higher-grade, HR-, HER2+ tumors, more PLNs, fewer NLNs, Ki-67 ≥ 20%, LVI, and extranodal extension (p ≤ 0.001). In the no-PMRT group, LNR-based OS/LRFS models exhibited superior prognostic performance.

CONCLUSION

In early-stage BC patients undergoing mastectomies, LN dissections and no PMRT, we propose LNR-based multivariable models to predict OS/LRFS with superior accuracy.

Real-world impact of postmastectomy radiotherapy in T1-2 breast cancer with one to three positive lymph nodes

Background

The utility of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in breast cancer patients with T1-2 (tumor size ≤5 cm) and N1 (one to three lymph nodes involved) disease remains controversial. The aim of this population-based study was to investigate the effectiveness of PMRT in this patient subset in the current clinical practice.

Methods

We included T1-2N1 breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy from 2004 to 2012 using the data form the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. The association of PMRT administration with breast cancer-specific survival was determined using multivariable Cox analysis.

Results

We identified 10,248 patients of this study, including 3,725 (36.3%) received PMRT and 6,523 (63.7%) patients did not receive PMRT. Use of PMRT showed increase from 2008 onward; the percentage of patients receiving PMRT was 30.6% in 2004 and was 47.1% in 2012 (P<0.001). Patients diagnosis after 2008, aged <50 years, high tumor grade, T2 stage, and ≥2 positive lymph nodes were independently related to PMRT receipt. Multivariate analysis indicated that PMRT was not related to better breast cancer-specific survival compared to those without PMRT both before (P=0.186) and after propensity score matching (P=0.137).

Conclusions

In breast cancer with T1-2N1 disease, PMRT does not appear to improve survival in the era of modern systemic therapy.

CPNE1 predicts poor prognosis and promotes tumorigenesis and radioresistance via the AKT singling pathway in triple-negative breast cancer

Elevated expression of Copine 1 (CPNE1) has been observed in multiple cancers; however, the underlying mechanisms by which it affects cancer cells are unclear. We aimed to study the effect of CPNE1 on the tumorigenesis and radioresistance of triple‐negative breast cancer (TNBC). Quantitative real‐time polymerase chain reaction was used to detect the expression of CPNE1 in TNBC tissues and cell lines. Western blot, immunohistochemistry, and immunofluorescence were used to investigate the levels of CPNE1, p‐AKT, AKT, cleaved caspase‐3, cleaved PARP1, and γ‐H2AX. Cell viability and apoptosis were measured by CCK‐8 and flow cytometry, respectively. CPNE1 was overexpressed in TNBC tissues and cell lines and was associated with tumor size, distant metastases, and survival rates of patients with TNBC. Moreover, function study shows that CPNE1 promoted cell viability and inhibited cell apoptosis in vitro and inhibited the radiosensitivity of TNBC. Importantly, inactivation of AKT signaling inhibited the tumorigenesis and radioresistance mediated by CPNE1 in TNBC cells. In vivo xenograft study also shows that CPNE1 knockdown inhibited tumor growth and promoted cell apoptosis. Overall, our findings suggest that CPNE1 promotes tumorigenesis and radioresistance in TNBC by regulating AKT activation and targeted CPNE1 expression may be a strategy to sensitize TNBC cells toward radiation therapy.

Post-mastectomy radiation therapy in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes: No one size fits all

Post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is standard therapy for advanced breast cancer. However, given the lower risk of recurrence, PMRT administration remains controversial in select patients with limited nodal disease. We performed a review of the literature that focuses on the effect of PMRT in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes, mainly examining loco-regional recurrence (LRR) and overall survival (OS). Most studies, including a large meta-analysis by the EBCTCG, showed a significant improvement in LRR rates among patients receiving PMRT. While most studies demonstrated a trend towards OS improvement, only few studies showed a statistically significant OS or breast cancer-specific survival benefit for PMRT. As such, individualized treatment decisions are recommended, taking into consideration clinicopathological findings. Future studies with large sample sizes and long follow-up times are still needed to better assess the role of PMRT in patients with limited nodal involvement.

Post mastectomy radiotherapy for elderly patients with intermediate risk (T1-2N1 OR T3N0) breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

To determine if PMRT for elderly patients (>65 years old) with intermediate risk breast cancer (T1-2N1, T3N0) improves outcomes.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effects of PMRT to no PMRT for elderly patients with intermediate-risk breast cancer. We searched PubMed for eligible studies from Jan 2008 to Dec 2018. We assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the ROBINS-I tool and performed the meta-analysis with random effects model. The primary outcome of interest was overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes were breast cancer specific survival (BCSS), loco-regional (LRR) and distant disease recurrence (DDR).

Results

We found 2 retrospective cohort studies with 743 patients directly comparing PMRT to no PMRT. Both studies were judged to have serious risk of bias in their methodological quality. The pooled results suggest that PMRT was associated with a 20% relative reduction in the hazard in death, ranging from 41% relative reduction, a substantial negative association to 10% relative increase, a small positive association (HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.59–1.1, P=0.62, I²=0%). PMRT was also associated with a 17% relative reduction in the hazard for breast cancer related death, ranging from 52% relative reduction, a substantial negative association to 41% relative increase, a substantial positive association (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.48–1.41, P=0.48, I²=0%). One study did not observe any significant differences in LRR and DDR between the two groups.

Conclusions

The survival benefits from PMRT in unselected elderly patients with intermediate risk breast cancer is unclear. Further research to better select elderly patients who may benefit from PMRT is warranted. Patients with a multiple pathological risk factors suggestive of high risk of loco-regional recurrence post-mastectomy should consider PMRT.

Postmastectomy radiotherapy in T1-2 patients with one to three positive lymph nodes - Past, present and future

PAST: The role of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) in patients with tumor <5 cm and one to three positive lymph nodes after axillary dissection (ALND) is vigorously debated. Initial doubts over the efficacy and safety of PMRT in these patients were partially overcome by improvement in technology and systemic treatments. Several randomized controlled clinical trials confirmed benefit of PMRT in N1 patients, which were meta-analyzed by the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). This meta-analysis provides the sole high-level evidence to guide clinical decision-making. PRESENT: Nevertheless, concerns have been evoked around these results, most notably concerning the patient selection bias and the era in which the patients were treated. More recent studies, albeit retrospective, are in contrast with this level I evidence, unequivocally reporting inferior recurrence rates in control arms than those of the EBCTCG meta-analysis. Taken together, these results suggest that one solution would not fit all N1 patients and that patient selection for PMRT shall be stratified upon risks factors. Most prominent of such factors identified are: patient age; number and ratio of positive lymph nodes; histological features such as lymphovascular invasion; and hormone receptor expression. FUTURE: A prospective randomized controlled trial SUPREMO will release its final results in 2023 and shed light onto the subject. Genomic tumor cell profiling will likely provide further guidelines in terms of risk stratification. SUPREMO translational sub-study will also offer material for genomic analyses. A cross-field tendency to forgo nodal dissection in favor of sentinel lymph node biopsy followed by nodal irradiation might eventually render the question of PMRT indication after ALND irrelevant.

Comparison of Breast Conserving Surgery Followed by Radiation Therapy with Mastectomy Alone for Pathologic N1 Breast Cancer Patients in the Era of Anthracycline Plus Taxane-Based Chemotherapy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study (KROG 1418)

PURPOSE

We compared the oncologic outcomes of breast-conserving surgery plus radiation therapy (BCS+RT) and modified radical mastectomy (MRM) under anthracycline plus taxane-based (AT) regimens and investigated the role of adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) in patients with pathologic N1 (pN1) breast cancer treated by mastectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 2,011 patients with pN1 breast cancer who underwent BCS+RT or MRM alone at 12 institutions between January 2006 and December 2010. Two-to-one propensity score matching was performed for balances in variables between the groups.

RESULTS

The median follow-up duration for the total cohort was 69 months (range, 1 to 114 months). After propensity score matching, 1,074 patients (676 in the BCS+RT group and 398 in the MRM-alone group) were analyzed finally. The overall survival, disease-free survival, locoregional failure-free survival, and regional failure-free survival (RFFS) curves of the BCS+RT group vs. MRM-alone group were not significantly different. The subgroup analysis revealed that in the group with both lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and histologic grade (HG) III, the BCS+RT showed significantly superior RFFS (p=0.008). Lymphedema (p=0.007) and radiation pneumonitis (p=0.031) occurred more frequently in the BCS+RT group than in the MRM-alone group, significantly.

CONCLUSION

There are no differences in oncologic outcomes between BCS+RT and MRM-alone groups under the AT chemotherapy regimens for pN1 breast cancer. However, BCS+RT group showed superior RFFS to MRM-alone group in the patients with LVI and HG III. Adjuvant RT might be considerable for pN1 breast cancer patients with LVI and HG III.

Heterogeneity in Outcomes of Pathologic T1-2N1 Breast Cancer After Mastectomy: Looking Beyond Locoregional Failure Rates

PURPOSE

A meta-analysis of 22 randomized trials accrued from 1964 to 1986 demonstrated significantly higher rates of locoregional failure (LRF) and breast-cancer mortality in women with 1-3 positive nodes without postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) after mastectomy (mast.). Recent data demonstrate that PMRT reduces distant metastases (DM) in women with pN1 disease. The challenge today is whether all patients with pathologic T1-2pN1 disease have similar substantial LRF/DM risk that routinely warrants PMRT.

METHODS

We reviewed patients with pT1-2N1 breast cancer treated with mast. ± adjuvant systemic therapy without PMRT from 2000 to 2013. The endpoints were LRF and DM rates, estimated by cumulative incidence method.

RESULTS

We identified 468 patients with median follow-up of 6.3 years. Most (71%) were estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor + human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). There were 269 patients with 1+ node, 140 patients with 2+ nodes, and 59 patients with 3+ nodes. The 6-year LRF/DM rates were 4.1%/8.4%. Patients with 1+, 2+, and 3+ nodes had 6-year LRF of 2.3, 5.1 and 8.9%, respectively (p = 0.13). The 6-year DM rate was higher in patients with 3+ nodes versus 1-2+ nodes: 15.7% versus 7.4% (p = 0.02). Several subgroups had low 6-year LRF and DM rates, including T1/1+ node (0.8%/4.1% LRF/DM) and micrometastases (0%/5.8% LRF/DM).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with pT1-2pN1 represent a heterogeneous group with a wide range of LRF/DM rates. In particular, patients with pT1 tumors and 1 + LN, and patients with micrometastases, had low event rates. These groups would derive small absolute reductions in LRF and DM with addition of PMRT, underscoring the importance of patient selection for PMRT in pT1-2pN1 breast cancer.

Association between unilateral or bilateral mastectomy and breast cancer death in patients with unilateral ductal carcinoma

Background

Utilization of bilateral mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer is increasing despite cost and surgical risks with conflicting reports of survival benefit. Current studies evaluating death after bilateral mastectomy have included patients treated both with breast conservation therapy and unilateral mastectomy. In this study, we directly compared breast cancer–specific death of patients who underwent bilateral or unilateral mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer using a matched cohort analysis.

Methods

This was an observational study of women diagnosed with unilateral breast cancer from 1998 through 2002, using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. A 4-to-1 matched cohort of patients was selected including 14,075 patients. Mortality of the groups was compared using Cox proportional hazards models for cause-specific death.

Results

A total of 41,510 patients diagnosed with unilateral breast cancer were included. Unilateral mastectomy was performed in 93% of patients, while bilateral mastectomy was performed in the remaining 7% of patients. When 4-to-1 matching was performed, 11,260 unilateral mastectomy and 2,815 bilateral mastectomy patients were included. Patients with bilateral mastectomy did not have a significantly lower hazard of breast cancer–specific death when compared with patients with unilateral mastectomy (hazard ratio: 0.92 vs 1.00, p=0.11).

Conclusion

Bilateral mastectomy did not provide a clinically or statistically significant breast cancer–specific mortality benefit over unilateral mastectomy based on a matched cohort analysis of a nationwide population database. These findings should be interpreted in the context of patient preference and alternative benefits of bilateral mastectomy.